Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-03-08
THE DRUMMERS.
IMPORTANT DECISION BY THE UNrfED
STATES SUPREME COURT.
state Laws Taxing Outside Sample
Merchants Pronounced IN.
constitutional.
TBy teIerraph 70 The pIspatcb. /

decisionwas rendered in the case of Sa-
bine Robbins, plaintiff in error, against
the taxing district of Shelby county,
Tennessee, in error to the Supreme
Court of Tennessee.
This case arises out fthe following state
of facts Robbins was engaged in Mem
phis in soliciting order for stationery for
a Cincinnati firm, and in exhibiting sam
Piles for the purpose of effecting sales a
State law, applicable only to this one
taxing district, was in force, subjecting
"drummers andall persons not having
a regular licensed house Of business in.
the district, Offering or selling goods by
sample, to a tax of $40 week or S25
month. Robbins, who was unli-
censed, was arrested, tried, con-
victed, and fined, and on appeal the
Judgment was affirmed. The case has
been brought to this court on a writ of
error upon the ground that the law i'm
posing the tax is repugnant to that
clause of the Constitution of the United
States which declares that Congress
shall have power TO regulate commerce
among the several States. The princi-
pal question involved is as TO the con-
stitutionality Of the act which imposed
the tax, and it is, i'll the opinion of this
Court, a question of great importance
TO the people of the United States both
as respects their business interests and
Their constitutional rights.
In a long and carefully-prepared
opinion 10y Justice Bradley this court
holds:
]. That the Constitution gives to Con-
cress power to regulate commerce
among the States, and that power is
necessarily exclusive whenever the sub
jects Of it are national in their charac-
ter or admit only of one uniform sys
TEN or plan of regulation.
2. Where the power of Congress to
regulate is exclusive its failure TO act
indicates its will that the subject shall
be left free from any restrictions or i'm
positions, and any regulations by States
except in matters of local concern only
is repugnant to such freedom.
3. The only way in which the com
merce between the States can be legiti
mately affected by State laws is when
by virtue of its police power and its
jurisdiction over persons and property
within its limits State provides for the
security of life, limb, health, comfort,
and property, or when it does those
things which may incidentally affect
commerce. But in making such inter
nal regulations State cannot impose
taxes upon persons passing through or
coming in merely for a temporary pur-
pose nor upon property imported and
not yet become part of the common
mass and no discrimination can be
made by any such regulation adversely
to the persons or property OF other
States and no regulation can be made
directly affecting interstate commerce.
in the matterof interstate commerce
the United States are, in the opinion OF
this Court, but one country, andare and
must be subject to one system of regu-
lations and not to multitude of regrI-
lations. Ii seems to be forgotten that
the people of this country are citizens
of the United States as well as Of indi-
vidual States, and that they have some
rights under the Constitution and laws
of the former Independent of the latter
and free from any interference or re-
straint from them.
To deny a State the power to lay
the tax or require the license in
question will not, the Court believes,
in any perceptible degree dimin-
ish It's resources. The goods, when
brought into the State, in consequence
of the sale by the drummer, will be
liable to taxation, and as much will be
realized as if the tax were imposed be-
fore the sale. To tax the sale of goods
under such circumstances before sale IL,
in the opinion of the Court clearly
tax on Interstate commerce itself If
employment of drummers injuriously
affects local trade Congress may be ap-
pealed to to make such regulations as
the case may demand and Congress
alone can do this. The confusion into
which the commerce of the country
would be thrown by being subjected to
State legislation on this subject would
be, the Court says, but a repetition of
the disorder which prevailed under the
old articles of confederation.
The judgment of the Supreme Court
Of Tennessee is reversed, and heplain-
tiff in error is ordered to be discharged.
Opinion by Justice Bradley, the Chief
Justice and Justices Field and Gray dis
senting on the ground that the law in
question is applicable TO drummers
coming into the Shelby county district
from other parts of Tennessee as well
as to those from other States, and to
relieve the latter from the taxation i'm
posed on the former would be discrimi-
nation against the citizens of State.
A similar decision was rendered, all
the Justices concurring, in the case of
George W. Carson, plaintiff in error,
against the State of Maryland. The
Judgment of the Court of Appeals of
that State is reversed, and the cause re-
handed, with directions that the plain
tiff in error be discharged.